Subject: Your all complaining about NAT mostly

From: [email-masked] (Dan Kolis)
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 08:40:34 -0500

I'm making a product from scratch shortly and think the tide has turned to
support IPv6 as much as possible. I haven't looked. Are Docsis Cable modems
2.0 IPv6 aware? How about MS operating systems?

If ISP's and cable ops didn't ration fixed IP's NAT wouldn't be so popular.
Its a way to evade an cost which is arguably illegitimate in the first
place. The operators caused this, and not it reduces there income. They did
it to make money; (and also were too busy to notice what they were doing).
Can be fixed in a number of ways.
-Dan K

>Almost all via dual-stack.    Those who have done so have
>found the extra cost minimal where the v6 capability is introduced as part of 
>a normal procurement cycle.   The UK academic backbone JANET is one example
>in your context.  Remember it's not about migrating in most circumstances,
>it's about parallel capability to enable v6 to operate now as the first phase
>of a (very long) transition.   But some networks are emerging ipv6-only, 
>particularly in Asia.
>Tim

---

From: [email-masked] (Dan Kolis)
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 09:24:47 -0500

>Actually, I'm told by ISP people that they don't make money off their address
>charges, that they basically just cover their own costs.
>Noel

Bell Canada here charges $10 or so for a few fixed IP's per month. They are
bought for $0.60 US as a one time cost.

A pretty "good cover".

Regs,
Dan

Dan Kolis - Lindsay Electronics Ltd [email-masked]
50 Mary Street West, Lindsay Ontario Canada K9V 2S7
(705) 324-2196  X272             (705) 324-5474 Fax
An ISO 9001 Company; 
/Document end